A Study on Leadership and Evacuation Behavior in an Emergency

对1985年7月长野市发生山体滑坡灾害前后各组织和居民的反应进行了调查。因此。我们发现，灾难发生前的假警报并不总是对居民的快速反应产生负面影响。相反，它使他们为撤离做好了准备，特别是通过一些居民的适当领导。另一方面，包括城市办公室在内的大多数组织都没有有效地应对灾难，因为他们对灾难的看法过于乐观，陷入了糟糕的决策过程。由于有人认为，领导和决策过程在紧急情况下发挥了重要作用，我们进行了两个实验来检验这些观点。首先，我们调查了在正常情况下，当突发事件发生时，领导对下属应对行为的影响。基于Misumi的性能(P)-维护(M)理论。我们介绍了两种类型的领导行为。其中一种是p行为，它强调群体目标的实现。另一种是促进群体凝聚力的m行为。因此，我们发现，最有效的领导快速反应的追随者是一个结合了上述两种行为。其次，我们研究了领导对群体决策过程的影响。在紧急情况下的群体决策。这个群体的成员常常过分地相互遵从，以至于他们不能充分地研究重要的信息。我们介绍了两种类型的领导行为。p行为包括强调需要考虑多种类型的信息，以及敦促成员达成正确的解决方案。而m行为则是建立一个自由和参与的氛围。结果再次表明，最有效的领导是结合了上述两种行为的领导。

We conducted a survey about the response of organizations and inhabitants before and after the landslide disaster which happened in Nagano city in July. 1985. As a result. we found that a false alarm before the disaster didn't always have a negative effect on the quick response of the inhabitants. Rather it made them ready for the evacuation especially through the appropriate leadership of some inhabitants. On the other hand most of the organizations including the city office did not cope with the disaster effectively because they had too optimistic a view for it and fell into poor decision-making processes.As it was suggested that leadership and decision-making processes played an important role in an emergency, we conducted two experiments to examine these points.First we investigated the effect of leadership in normal times on the follower's coping behavior when an emergency occurred. based on Misumi's Performance(P)-Maintenance(M) theory. We introduced two types of leadership behavior.One of them is P-behavior which emphasizes group goal achievement. The other is M-behavior which facilitates group cohesiveness. As a result we found that the most effective leadership for a quick response by the followers was one which combines the two behaviors mentioned above.Secondly we investigated the effects of leadership on group decision processes. In group decision-making in an emergency situation. members of the group often conform to one another excessively so that they do not examine important information sufficiently. We introduced two types of leadership behavior. P-behavior consisted of emphasizing that many types of information should be taken into consideration as well as pressing the members to reach a correct solution. while M-behavior consisted of establishing a free and participative atmosphere. The results again showed that the most effective leadership was one which combined two behaviors mentioned above.